Agenda item

Governance Options for the City of Bath

A short presentation on the Governance Options
for the City of Bath will be given. The forum will then have an
opportunity to ask questions.

Minutes:

A presentation was given by Andy Thomas and
Maria Lucas on Governance Options for the City of Bath.

This presentation was brought to the forum on
the request which came from forum members at previous meetings.

The presentation has been attached; the slide
that refers to community governance reviews had the wrong number in
the papers that were distributed in advance of the meeting. The
bullet that was shown at the meeting contained the correct number
and read

·
Triggered by a petition of >7.5%. The total electorate for Bath
as at 1st March 2018 is 62,891, this would therefore require 4,716
signatures

Questions and comments were taken following on
from the presentation.

1.
Cllr Dine Romero –

(i)
Was there a Bath Area Committee that came before Bath City
Forum?

(ii)
If Bath was parished what would be the impact on the mayoralty
functions?

(iii)
How is the electorate for Bath defined?

(iv)
How is the Bath Boundary defined?

Response –

(i)
There was a Bath South Area Committee prior to the establishment of
the Bath City Forum, when the review took place in 2013-2014 this
committee was no longer in place.

(ii)
If an unparished area becomes one or more parish council the
arrangements in place for the mayoralty become redundant. The new
Council/s will have elections for parish councillors and will elect
a Chair. Local Councils can decide to have new arrangements for a
Mayor which covers the parish area.

(iii)
The electorate figure is taken on a set date from the electoral
role and includes the Wards in Bath.

(iv)
There is a Boundary Review underway which reports back on 8 May
2018. Once this has been completed the Bath Boundary will be
defined.

2.
Cllr Rob Appleyard

(i)
Where is the public support?

(ii)
Is this what is wanted by our communities?

(iii)
What is it that is missing at the moment other that the pressures
from funding?

(iv)
When looking at the work carried out previously, 37% of those who
responded said an area committee was preferred but when combined
the total for the parish options was 50%.

(v)
The mayoralty of this city is in its 790th year and is
still making valuable contributions to Bath.

Response from Ashley
Ayre – This item has been brought to the forum through a
request which came through the agenda setting group. Bath and North
East Somerset Council are not proposing a Community Governance
Review.

3.
Virginia Williamson – There has not been a conversation about
what is wrong with engagement and comments have not been taken on
which reflect what people want to say.

Response –

·
A parish council has differences and would have separately elected
parish councillors, the minimum being five councillors for a small
parish area. Where parishes have casual vacancies they are able to
co-opt, this is usually because not enough candidates stand or due
to a resignation.

·
Candidates that stand can be Independent, a minor party or a
conventional political party.

·
Ward Councillors in a unitary authority like B&NES could also
stand to be a councillor on a parish council.

·
If Bath were to become a single parish it would be one of the
largest in the country.

4.
Cllr Joe Rayment – Effective community representation needs
to be delivered when looking to the size for a new parish area. It
is important that the people in Bath make a decision based upon
fair and freely available information.

Response from Cllr
Paul Myers – A Community Governance Review would have clear
and meaningful discussions with the people and information would be
made available. The role of what a new parish can be simple or
complex but when an outcome is reached there will be a balance with
trade-offs if change is going to happen.

Cllr Paul Myers is a
happy to share his experience of Community Governance Review with
anybody who wishes to gain a greater understanding.

5.
Cllr Anthony Clarke explained that he holds a role in a parish
council which he filled through a casual vacancy.

·
The role of the Chartered Trustees was given to the city to protect
the mayoralty when Bath City Council was abolished. Since then the
number of place in the country that have this arrangement has
fallen from 200 to just 40.Bath are the largest place that have
this arrangement with most of the others being very small
places.

·
There is a serious argument to think about making Bath a Parish,
the change that would become clear is that a parish has the ability
of carrying out the will of what locals want.

·
Chartered Trustees are not parish councillors and do not hold the
powers to carry out functions that parishes do.

6.
Cllr Shaun Stephenson-McGall –

·
There are decisions that need to be made and these are close to the
people affected. These will be a choice that the city will need to
take with the understanding that additional service provision will
need a precept charge to cover these costs.

·
Residents in the Bath are missing out on services that could be
provided should a parish be created.

·
The Councillors for Bath will need to be involved in a political
debate about this issue and offer the public clear options.

·
Swindon recently went through a Community Governance Review and
opted to have four new parished areas.

·
What is the exact date that the rolling electoral register is used
on to set the numbers of signatures required?

Response – There is a rule about the cut of date, we will
need to look up the guidance and then will feed this back.

7.
Nicolette Boater –

·
The debates of the 2013-15 cross-party councillor working group
(which I reviewed, and some of which, I attended) were more focused
on community liaison than on Bath governance. Consequently concerns about the latter were not
addressed in either the composition or powers of the resulting Bath
City Forum.

·
The 2014/15 VoiceBox survey of 3,000 B&NES residents on a wide
range of subjects, indicated that although Bath residents appeared
to be more pro parishing than those in North East Somerset, few
residents understood or fully engaged with these governance issues
(with the majority having no view, and preferences more determined
by the definition of options than their content).

·
The Bath governance deficit, currently manifested in there being
only 2 out of 8 B&NES Cabinet members from Bath wards, is only
going to get bigger. Not only is the Ward Boundary review likely to
result in a disproportionate reduction in the number of Bath
relative to North East Somerset councillors, but such central
government powers and diminishing resources that are directed to
localities are increasingly being directed at regional or large
local authority areas rather than small cities such as Bath.

·
The real worth of improving Bath governance comes from its long
term benefits - an investment of £100k in a Community
Governance Review may be insignificant relative to benefits flowing
from 22 years of improved governance and protection of the
city’s assets and services. However, a Community Governance
Review would only be the start of a complex set of considerations
where there will be conflicting community interests and compromises
will have to be made.

·
I hope the forum will take the debate on improving Bath’s
governance forward, and in so doing, will be diligent in assembling
information and conversing with communities, and open-minded in
developing and appraising options.

8.
Cllr Patrick Anketell-Jones –

·
Shaun’s comments summarised the points very well.

·
If we do make a choice to do anything it will take many years to
develop a fully functional new local council.

·
The Bath City Forum determines its arrangements and links to the
community, as it is an unelected body whose powers are determined
by B&NES Council.

·
We presently have a way of working; if the Bath City Forum wants to
expand its remit, there is a process to review the terms of
reference by going through Council.

9.
Cllr Paul Myers -

·
The process that has to be followed for creation of a new parish
needs to start with a fair minded body that are willing to discuss
the issues, understand what the outcomes might be and work
together.

·
If a new parish is the outcome there will then be all of the
regulations that will need setting in place.

·
This is only the start as governance needs to be lived and newly
elected parish councillors need to have the judgement to represent
the people well.

·
There are choices that have to be taken about what a parish is
going to take responsibility for, this can have many difference in
parished areas.

10.Andrew Page
–

·
What is the challenge that we are setting out to solve?

·
If the Bath City Forum is unable to act in the ways it wants to
then can this be fixed through additional delegated
responsibilities?

·
Is this issue about the gaps in funding?

11.Cllr Dine Romero –

·
We are talking about paying for services that we need in Bath

·
What happens to the money that gets generated in Bath?

·
Do we have a list of designated statutory duties that have to be
provided by a unitary authority?

12.Cllr
Shaun Stephenson-McGall –

·
The geography that we are part of is important, we need to have an
identity and a sense of belonging to a community. If all our
decisions are being made by B&NES this harms democracy.

·
Locality is about our city; think how it must feel for people
living in Whitchurch that are having services run from Bath.

·
We need to decide what we want for our future, if this is to be a
Community Governance Review it is fair to say it could take around
18 months (as it did in Swindon), If the outcome is like that of
Swindon we then have to build new local council/s.

·
It would be helpful to hold a separate event (separate to the
forum) to hear about experiences of where this has already
happened.

13.Cllr Colin Blackburn –

·
The boundary review reports back to B&NES on 8th May
2018.

·
This session has opened your eyes and ears to what options could be
explored.

·
The position now will be for the communities to discuss what they
want going forward and decide if they have the will to move
forward.

14.Rosie Phillips –

·
We need to be clear on why we are asking the question

·
The decision making needs to engage with communities including
those who are harder to reach.

·
Simple , easy to understand information needs to be freely
available

·
Early discussions are needed and then need to be returned to.

15.Cllr Joe Rayment –

·
It appears that frustrations have arisen due to the advisory level
that the forum presently holds. This is not able to be resolved
unless we move to a body that hold elected powers.

·
It would be worth exploring the options by holding
afternoon/evening sessions to gain community views.

·
In this meeting of the forum there appears to have been no
objections raised on the idea of moving towards a parish
option?

Response – The comment about no objects was not met with full
agreement although nobody formally responded.